U.S. patent number 3,794,827 [Application Number 05/322,056] was granted by the patent office on 1974-02-26 for invel system of velocity determination.
This patent grant is currently assigned to Amoco Production Company. Invention is credited to Moses B. Widess.
United States Patent |
3,794,827 |
Widess |
February 26, 1974 |
INVEL SYSTEM OF VELOCITY DETERMINATION
Abstract
This is a new way of compositing multifold common-depth-point
data from seismic prospecting operations to improve the making of
static corrections, particularly when determining velocity. Such
static corrections eliminate time differences in arrival of
reflected seismic events on the various traces of a seismic spread
due to differences in thickness of the low velocity or "weathered"
layer below the geophones, to differences in surface elevation, and
the like. Seismic waves are generated successively at generating
points, each near the earth's surface. Seismic waves are received
and reproducibly recorded at geophones at least one of which in
each case is close to the generating point and another is near the
location of another generating point. These spatial relationships
are symmetrical. Reproduced reflected waves from each generating
point received at the respective near geophone locations are
composited at approximately equal peak amplitudes. This procedure
is then repeated for new generating and receiving points which
maintain approximately constant the mean location of reflection
points on the seismic reflecting beds. Visual traces equivalent to
the composited "short" traces are reproduced after elimination of
the normal moveout correction. The reflections from a common
reflecting bed are aligned by introducing a static correction into
each composited trace to produce substantial time alignment at a
mean reflection time. The identical seismic static correction is
then applied to any further record processing of the seismic data
from the "far" geophones, similarly composited, before producing
visual traces of such data. The procedure is valuable both for
making velocity panels for determination of velocity vs. depth in
seismic prospects, and in determining depth and/or dip of
reflecting subsurface discontinuities.
Inventors: |
Widess; Moses B. (Houston,
TX) |
Assignee: |
Amoco Production Company
(Tulsa, OK)
|
Family
ID: |
23253219 |
Appl.
No.: |
05/322,056 |
Filed: |
January 8, 1973 |
Current U.S.
Class: |
367/54; 367/52;
367/56; 367/63 |
Current CPC
Class: |
G01V
1/28 (20130101) |
Current International
Class: |
G01V
1/28 (20060101); G01v 001/36 () |
Field of
Search: |
;340/15.5TC,15.5TD,15.5CP,15.5MC |
References Cited
[Referenced By]
U.S. Patent Documents
Primary Examiner: Wilbur; Maynard R.
Assistant Examiner: Birmiel; H. A.
Attorney, Agent or Firm: Hawley; Paul F.
Claims
I claim:
1. A method of seismic prospecting including the steps of
1. generating seismic waves at a first generating point near the
earth's surface;
2. separately receiving and reproducibly recording said seismic
waves reflected from a subsurface bed at least at two receiving
points at or near the earth's surface, one near and one far from
said first generating point;
3. separately generating seismic waves at a second generating point
near the earth's surface in symmetrical relation to the first
generating point and near said receiving point which is far from
said first generating point;
4. separately receiving at least near the said two receiving points
and reproducibly recording the seismic waves generated in step 3)
and reflected from said subsurface bed;
5. reproducing and compositing said received recorded seismic waves
from said first and said second generating point received in each
case at the near receiving point, at approximately equal average
amplitude;
6. repeating steps 1) to 5) inclusive, employing new generating and
new receiving stations, while maintaining (a) substantially the
same distance from each generating point to the near receiving
points used in steps 2) and 3), and (b) substantially the same
midpoint between the two new generating points and far receivers as
was defined by the first two generating points and corresponding
far receivers;
7. producing a first visual image of each of the said composited
received waves as one seismic trace of a plurality of such traces
in side-by-side relation;
8. introducing such a static correction into each such composited
trace as produces substantially time alignment of said traces at a
mean reflection time on said traces, whereby such correction for
each such trace is directly related to the two locations of
generation points used in producing such trace;
9. reproducing and compositing at approximately equal average
amplitude said received recorded seismic waves from said first and
said second generating point received in each case at the far
receiving point, in the steps 1) to 6);
10. introducing the same static correction into each composited set
of waves in step 9) as that already introduced in step 8) for the
same location of the two generating points involved in step 8)
respectively; and
11. making a second visual image derived from each composited set
of waves from step 10) after introduction of the appropriate static
corrections, in the form of side-by-side seismic traces.
2. A method in accordance with claim 1 including repeating steps 1)
to 6), 9) and 10) a plurality of at least four times so that at
least five seismic traces are present in said first and said second
visual images in side-by-side relationship, to permit a more
precise determination of said mean reflection time on said traces
in step 8).
3. A method in accordance with claim 2 in which between steps 10)
and 11) a second, dynamic time correction equal to the normal
moveout appropriate to the region of said prospecting is introduced
into each of said set of waves.
4. A method in accordance with claim 2 in which between steps 10)
and 11) a plurality of second, dynamic time corrections (each equal
to the normal moveout for a different variation of subsurface
velocity with depth) is introduced into each of said traces and
step 11) is repeated for each of said plurality of corrections
corresponding to one of said variations of subsurface velocity with
depth.
5. A method in accordance with claim 2 in which said mean
reflection time is chosen from only reflections of good quality
from a reflecting stratum of low curvature.
Description
BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION
1. Field of the Invention
Seismic geophysical prospecting by the reflection method has been
practiced in the United States since the late 1920's. There has
been a tremendous improvement in the methods of handling seismic
reflection data and of making the necessary corrections to indicate
more accurately the subsurface variations in depth and dip in each
prospect. Two types of corrections are ordinarily employed in
reducing the original data to useful form. One of these is the
so-called static correction; the other, the dynamic correction.
It is well known in this art that static corrections consist of
changes in travel time of the reflected seismic waves introduced on
the received traces in processing to compensate throughout the
record for the effects of such variables as changes in thickness of
the low-speed layer or weathered layer as it is cometimes called,
the effect of changes in surface elevation of the receivers and the
like. When such a correction is made on a theoretically perfect
basis, there is no time difference between the seismic traces
resulting from received waves at geophones located at various
staions for the same reflected event appearing on any trace due to
changes in thickness of the weathered layer or due to the fact that
one geophone is higher than another. This is discussed in detail in
every modern work on seismic geophysical prospecting and in many
research papers which have been published in such magazines as
Geophysics.
Similarly, the dynamic corrections are differences of time
introduced systematically into the traces in amounts which
compensate for the fact that for any reflection, the received waves
arrived at geophones at different surface locations at different
times due to the differences in distance from the seismic wave
generation point. Such corrections are called "normal moveout."
They are a function of the distance from source to receiver (the
so-called x-distance) and also the average speed of seismic waves
to the reflecting bed and hence changes from geophone to geophone
for any one source location. For any geophone, the dynamic
correction is greater for shallow reflection events and lesser for
more deep-seated reflections with greater travel times. The general
effect of the introduction of dynamic correction into the data
obtained from any particular source location is to eliminate
theoretically the effect of the x-distance so that the traces from
geophones at different x-distances are corrected ideally as if they
were all due to a source and geophone having the same location.
In order to make accurate normal movement corrections, it is
necessary to have precise determination of the average seismic
velocity of compressional waves as a function of the varying depth
to reflecting beds. Since these velocities are found in practice to
change from one geographical location to another, the dynamic
correction applied for one location may be improper when applied at
another, and result in a fictitious misdetermination of either
depth to reflecting horizon or the dip of this horizon. As a
result, various methods have been evolved for determining velocity
in terms of depth from the normal moveout of seismic traces, which
are functions of x-distance (determinable) and variation of
velocity with depth. Two classes of methods for determining this
velocity have resulted, particularly when the general system of
obtaining the data is the common depth point system which was first
shown in the Mayne U.S. Pat. No. 2,732,906. The class most commonly
used consists of the common depth point (CDP) velocity methods, in
which the normal moveout is determined from the traces of a
CDP-gather. It is known to those skilled in this art that such
methods have the merit of eliminating the error resulting from
curvature of reflecting strata, but they are subject to error from
inaccurate statics. An example of such a method is the Ferree et
al. U.S. Pat. No. 3,681,749.
The other class of ways to determine velocity from normal moveout
consists of the interlocking-profile methods. In these methods
statics are eliminated, but error is incurred from bed curvature.
Since in most land prospects the static error is more severe than
relfecting bed curvature, the interlocking-profile methods have
considerable appeal.
Both of these classes of methods are readily applicable when
reflection moveouts are picked out either manually or by a
computer. Furthermore, CDP velocity methods are known which do not
require picking reflections, in one sense of the term. In such
methods the so-called velocity panel method is of definite
importance. Here the seismic data obtained for a plurality of
x-distances but with common depth point, are displayed repeatedly
and for each display a different average velocity is employed so
that the dynamic corrections made change progressively from display
to display. On such a velocity panel, if ideal static corrections
have been made, the set of traces with normal moveouts
corresponding to a particular velocity function with depth should
show constant arrival time at a depth for which the assumed average
seismic velocity to that depth corresponds almost exactly to the
actual average seismic velocity to this depth. This is further
discussed in connection with my invention in the following
description of the preferred embodiment. It is sufficient to state
here that the general principles of this method have been known and
used in a variety of visual picking or computer determined
responses for sufficient time to show users that this is a very
valuable method, theoretically, of determining seismic velocity in
terms of depth. However, there has been one lack in such a system.
It has been not easy to provide a good static time correction
system. I have found that it is possible to eliminate the effect of
statics by what I call the INVEL method (that is, interlock
velocity) which in principle permits both precision in eliminating
static time differences between traces and also permits use of
static corrections which produces time alignment of the traces at a
desired mean reflection time. It is found that this type of static
correction is applicable of course not only to velocity panel
determinations but also to ordinary seismic determinations of depth
and dip of reflecting horizons.
DESCRIPTION OF THE PRIOR ART
Background on static and dynamic corrections in seismic prospecting
is found, as already mentioned, in any work on seismic prospecting.
For example, the text Geophysical Prospecting, by Milton Dobrin,
McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., New York, Second Edition, 1960,
covers normal moveout correction on pages 120-123 and static
corrections on pages 123-129, and gives a useful bibliography on
page 147. One method of making dynamic and static corrections by an
analog computer is discussed in the Evans U.S. Pat. No. 2,884,194
and another using a hybrid computer is the Hadley et al. U.S. Pat.
No. 3,323,104.
While at first glance it would appear that the Ferree patent
mentioned above is pertinent to the system of my invention, on
further consideration it will be noted that the actual correction
system there proposed is quite different. It does not make use of
traces from spaced pairs of sources and detectors and does not
employ the static correction based on short x-distances in making
the static corrections for traces of long x-distances.
SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION
Seismic data is obtained in which the reflections involve
pluralities of sets of seismic sources and receivers. In each set,
typically, there are four traces of predominant importance. For
each source the geophone spread includes two geophone group
locations, one near and one far from the source, which same
geophone group locations are used for a source located essentially
at the symmetrically opposite point. Thus, the configuration is
used in which each of the pair of sources produces data received by
the same pair of receivers. The two short traces have the same
x-distance and are composited to produce a single composited trace.
The key to this method is that the composite of the corresponding
long traces, which also have a respectively same x-distance, has
essentially the same static delay as the composite of the two short
traces. Thus a static correction applicable for the composited
short traces is applied to the composited long traces.
The common depth point method is employed. Thus after each set of
two sources is employed, another set of two sources is employed
with corresponding changes in the near and far geophone group
locations so that for the far geophone group location essentially
the same two reflecting points as before are involved on any bed.
If a conventional CDP prospecting system is employed, the normal
moveout correction is then applied (if necessary; ordinarily it
will not be) to a plurality of the composited short traces and
these traces are represented visually, usually with some scatter,
about a mean reflection time. The relative time delays, i.e.,
static corrections, are then changed so that the short traces are
time aligned on the mean reflection time. The remainder of the
seismic data is then corrected (that is, the long traces are
corrected), just in accordance with the static corrections
introduced on the short traces, before producing the record
sections.
In the preparation of velocity panels, exactly the same type of
static correction discussed above is applied to the composited long
traces for each pair of usually closely spaced common depth points.
The resultant velocity panels tend to show a very straight line for
all of the traces at each reflection horizont for the velocity
which corresponds to the actual velocity for the travel time.
As is common with other methods of using CDP data, it is possible
here to use quasi-CDP data in the sense of using data where the
pair of reflection points on a bed are not precisely that of other
pairs of traces but varies from them by not more than a half
geophone location.
BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAIWNGS
FIG. 1 shows in diagrammatic simplified form a cross section of the
earth, including a weathered zone of varying thickness and a
surface on which geophones may be at different vertical elevations,
showing three arrangements of sources and some of the corresponding
geophone group locations for obtaining CDP data of the type used in
this invention.
FIG. 2 shows in diagrammatic form some equipment for obtaining
composite traces used in this invention.
FIG. 3 shows a plurality of traces of composited data for a common
reflection as received at "near" and at "far" geophones,
respectively, before and after introducing the static time
correction which produces alignment.
FIG. 4 shows a portion of an INVEL section covering eight sets of
INVEL traces, as obtained for a specific field location.
FIG. 5 shows one type of INVEL display in which the sets of short
trace composited traces have been plotted separately from the sets
of longer trace composite traces, in velocity determinations.
FIG. 6 shows a typical velocity panel from which determinations of
seismic velocity as a function of depth may be obtained.
FIG. 7 shows in diagrammatic, simplified form the same cross
section shown in FIG. 1 with arrangements of sources and some
corresponding geophone group locations used with what are called
single-end seismic spreads.
DESCRIPTION OF THE PREFERRED EMBODIMENT
In FIG. 1 there is shown in schematic form a cross section of the
earth below the surface 17. Immediately below the surface is a low
velocity layer, often called the weathered layer, in which the
velocity of seismic compressional waves is of the order of 2,000
ft/second. This is bounded usually rather abruptly by a boundary
18, below which the seismic velocity is usually of the order of
three to four times that in the weathered layer. This velocity is a
function of the elastic constants and density of the various strata
which make it up. Due to compaction and similar effects, the
velocity below the weathered layer ordinarily increases with depth.
The effect of changing (increasing) seismic velocity with depth
produces generally curved rather than straight-line ray paths,
which are characteristic of constant velocity propagation. For
simplicity this is not shown in this figure. A reflecting bed is
shown at 19, where the elastic constants of the subsurface strata
change abruptly, and for simplicity of description we shall assume
the bed is flat. Numbers 1 to 16 represent locations at
substantially equal intervals (of the order of 200 to 500 feet) at
which either a seismic source or a group of geophones is centered.
A surface source is indicated by a rectangle at station 1. Such a
source could be, for example, a Vibroseis vibratory source, or a
weight-drop arrangement as has been described by McCollum or the
like. A plurality of geophone groups has been shown
diagrammatically by the smaller rectangles 2 through 15, and a
second source has been shown at location 16 by the second large
rectangle. The various geophone groups are connected in a spread to
multi-channel amplifiers, such as amplifiers 20, 21, and 22, and
hence to the multiple-trace recorder 23, which preferably is a
multitrace magnetic tape recorder, as is well known in this
art.
In use, the source 1 is first employed to generate seismic waves
which travel various paths. Some of these are reflected waves. They
are picked up at geophones at the various points along the spread.
Particularly of importance in this discussion are the geophone
groups centered at locations 3 and 14, which correspond to the
seismic ray paths 24 and 25, respectively. It is noted that these
paths include a section 26 through the low-speed bed at the
location of the first seismic source, as well as corresponding
paths 27 and 28 through the weathered layer at geophone group
locations 3 and 14, respectively. Put another way, the travel time
from source 1 to geophone 3 includes the time T.sub.26, T.sub.27,
corresponding to the path lengths 26 and 27, through the weathered
layer at locations 1 and 3, respectively. Similarly, the travel
time on path 25 to the geophone at location 14 involves the times
T.sub.26 and T.sub.28 corresponding to paths 26 and 28,
respectively. The geophone at location 3 can be considered "near,"
i.e., it has a small x-distance; whereas, geophone 14 is a "far"
geophone, i.e., involving a longer x-distance from the source.
The geophones being connected through amplifiers to tape recorder
23 produce separate reproducible records of the seismic waves
reflected from the subsurface bed 19 at the various geophone
locations shown. For simplicity the leads and amplifiers
corresponding to the geophone groups at stations 4-13,
respectively, have been omitted, but it is to be understood that
the output of these geophones are similarly reproducibly recorded
as separate traces on the magnetic record employed on recorder 23.
Additionally, as is well known in this art, there is recorded on
this record a time trace which permits the relative time between
any two events on the reproducible traces to be determined
accurately to the order of a millisecond.
It is convenient to show on this same cross section the seismic
wave path which results when a seismic source is ultimately set up
at location 16. The reflected paths to the geophones at stations 14
and 3, respectively (paths 29 and 30) are shown. NOte that the
source at station 16 occupies essentially the same position
relative to the geophone group at 14 as that at station 1 did at
the geophone group at station 3 in the first record. This is the
symmetrical relationship earlier mentioned. The seismic waves
reflected from subsurface bed 19 along wave paths 29 and 30 are
received at the geophone stations (including 14 and 3)
respectively, and are reproducibly recorded through the
multi-channel amplifiers 20-22 on the multiple trace recorder 23,
as in the step discussed above. The wave paths 25 and 30 have
reflection points 31 and 32, respectively, which are usually not
far apart.
If the surface generating source at station 1 and later at station
16 is of the impulsive variety, there is no need to correlate the
records produced on recorder 23. However, if these sources produce
vibratory waves of the Vibroseis type or equivalent, the pilot
signal should be recorded also and the first step in record
processing will involve reproducing the received waves and
correlating them as individual traces with the pilot signal to
produce in turn reproducible records of the sort which would have
been originally recorded if an impulsive source would have been
employed.
After the record has been made with the source at position 1, it is
next moved to location 2 (as shown in FIG. 1((b)) ), while the
geophone spread between locations 4 and 13 is maintained. Then the
wave paths of interest will be 33 (from the source at location 2 to
the geophone at position 4), and 34 (from the source at position 2
to the geophone at station 13). Subsequently, the source is moved
to location 15 and employed there, sending out waves, including
those on paths 35 and 36, respectively, received at the geophone
spread, including locations 13 and 4. For simplicity, the spread of
geophones between positions 4 and 13 has been omitted, but it is to
be understood that these are employed with the amplifiers and
recorder, as before. As before, the reproducible records which must
be obtained are those corresponding to an impulsive source obtained
directly or by correlation.
The third set of positions for the sources used is shown in FIG.
1(c), respectively at positions 3 and 14, maintaining the spread of
geophones between locations 5 and 12, as shown. In this case the
wave paths of particular interest are 37 and 38 for the source at
position 3, and 39 and 40 for the source at position 14. It is to
be noted in FIGS. 1(b) and (c) that reflection points 31 and 32 are
common on the reflecting bed 19 for all positions of the source,
while the reflection points between source and the "near" geophone
group are moving progressively along the bed. The x-distance
between source and near geophone group is essentially the same in
each position shown.
Still further similar movements of the source relative to the
geophone spread will ordinarily be employed. Thus, there will be
for each such arrangement two reproducible records corresponding to
the two positions of the source with respect to the end groups of
geophones as the spread is successively decreased in length, as far
as is desired. Ordinarily I prefer to use sufficient geophone
stations with intervals of about 200 to not more than about 500
feet between them, so that at least five (and preferably at least
eight) sets of records of waves traveling the paths of the type
shown in FIG. 1(a), (b), and (c) are available.
It is to be noted in FIG. 1 that the path 41, which is part of path
29 has been shown as the same as a part of path 30. While this is
not exactly so, the difference between these two path lengths and
orientations is not great and is sufficiently small so that it can
be neglected in the type calculations which follow. This is also
true of the paths 28 (part of paths 29 and 25), paths 27 (part of
paths 30 and 24), and paths 26 (part of paths 24 and 25). The same
essential simplification is shown in FIG. 1(b) and FIG. 1(c).
The first point in record processing (other than the obvious step
of correlating with a pilot signal if a nonimpulsive vibratory
source is used) is to reproduce the seismic waves received at gorup
location 3 with the source at station 1 and that at group location
14 due to the source at station 16. This is done on a reproducer,
for example any of the ordinary seismic playback units now well
known in the art. One such unit is shown diagrammatically in FIG.
2. Here, a revolving drum 50 carries a multiple trace magnetic
record 51 attached about the cylindrical surface. A plurality of
pickup coil units 52.sub.1 to 52.sub.14 are mounted slidably in
slots in a stationary cylindrical support 53 mounted so that the
position of each such pickup unit can be adjusted angularly with
respect to the position of all other such units. One side of the
leads to each of these pickup units is grounded; the other is
connected to a large resistance 54.sub.1 to 54.sub.14. Preferably
these are of equal maximum resistance. Switching terminals on a
switch 55 permit connecting identical low impedance add resistors
56.sub.1 to 56.sub.8 to the high resistances. Each of these add
impedances has a resistance preferably not above one-tenth of that
of each of the resistors 54.sub.1. The switching terminals on
switch 55 are used to connect one side of two of the add resistors
54.sub.n together to one add impedance 56.sub.n. This is a well
known expedient, used so that the relative amplitude of the signal
voltage on each of the add impedances such as 56.sub.1 is
proportional to the sum of the voltage outputs of the two pickup
units 52.sub.n to which it is connected. By adjusting the size of
the add resistors 54.sub.n, it is possible by trial and inspection
to insure that the voltage output of the add impedance 56.sub.n on
the average consists of at least roughly equal components from each
of the two magnetic traces on record 51 to which it is connected
through the multiple switch 55. Accordingly, when the drum 50 is
rotated about its axis at as near as possible constant angular
velocity, the generated voltage on each add impedance 56.sub.n is
composed at each instant of time of the sum of the instantaneous
amplitudes from two magnetic traces which in turn represent the
output of two geophone stations. The signal on each add impedance
is a composited signal. By this is meant that it is made up of at
least approximately equal contributions, on the average, of the
instantaneous signal voltages received at the two geophone stations
to which the magnetic traces correspond. The voltage across each
add resistor 56.sub.n is applied through one channel of a
multi-channel buffer amplifier 57.sub.n to one trace of a multiple
trace recorder 58 or multitrace oscillograph, a portion of the
record of which 59 is shown. This record is visual, on which traces
are presented in side-by-side relationship and may be presented in
variable amplitude, variable density, or other means of visual
presentation.
The operator of the unit shown in FIG. 2 is aware in advance of the
locations of the particular traces on the multiple trace magnetic
record 51 which he wishes to composite. These will be the traces
corresponding to paths 24 and 29, and 25 and 30, of the arrangement
shown in FIG. 1(a), and the corresponding traces for the changes
shown in FIG. 1(b), (c), and so on. Accordingly, the apparatus
shown in FIG. 2 is used to produce composited traces in which the
response of the "near" geophone groups have been added instant by
instant, for each spacing between the seismic sources. For example,
on a record of such compositing trace 1 of record 59 shows the
composited result of two traces corresponding to ray paths 24 and
29. Adjacent it, the second trace shows the composited result of
the waves on the ray paths 33 and 35; the next shows that for waves
along paths 37 and 39, and so on. Preferably another, separate
section of the record shows the composited result of the waves
received along ray paths 25 and 30 adjacent that composited from
the waves received along ray paths 34 and 36, which in turn is
adjacent that composited from the waves along ray paths 38 and 40,
and so on.
On FIG. 3 there is shown in the middle of the figure a series of
traces labeled 1 to 12. Traces 1 to 6, respectively, are a set of
composited traces on which trace 1 shows the composite
corresponding to ray paths 24 and 29. Similarly, trace 2 shows the
composite corresponding to ray paths 33 and 35, and that on trace 3
shows the composite corresponding to ray paths 37 and 39, and so
on. When these traces are shown in side-by-side relations, any
reflection from a common subsurface reflecting bed appearing on all
the traces will appear in a more or less regular timed sequence,
except that there may be irregularities due to static time
differences. Using the nomenclature that T.sub.1,3 represents the
travel time of the waves received at geophone group location 3 with
the source at location 1, it is seen from reference to FIG. 1 tha
trace 1 represents the compositing for waves of times T.sub.1,3 and
T.sub.16,14. In FIG. 3, the column just before the ray traces
specifies these various times. Each of these traces 1 to 6 could be
called a short-trace composite trace, since the distance along the
spread (the x-distance) is only two units, i.e., from position 1 to
position 3, or 16 to 14, and the like. This is a sufficiently short
distance so that the normal moveout correction is not significant.
Therefore, as stated above, if the static corrections on each of
these traces compensated precisely for differences in travel times
due to differences of weathering thickness and elevation
correction, all of the traces would show for each reflection
essential alignment at a mean reflection time, representing the
travel time to the bed concerned. Typically, however, one finds (as
shown in FIG. 3) that before alignment correction is applied, these
composited traces do not show this time alignemtn. The "picks" for
the second leg for each of these reflections are shown and it is
seen that on some traces to secure time alignment, a lag of a few
milliseconds needs to be introduced into the composite trace, and
into others a lead. This can be done after the mean time has been
determined, which is shown by the vertical line through the first
six traces. Thus, for example, trace 1 needs to be advanced
slightly, trace 2 advanced about 3 times trace 1, traces 3 and 4
lagged, etc. This is accomplished, knowing the angular speed of
rotation of drum 50, simply by moving arcuately the two pickup
units (such as 52.sub.1 and 52.sub.14). A lead is achieved by
moving these pickup units or heads opposite to the direction of
rotation of the drum; a lag by moving in the same direction as the
rotation. Ordinarily after a little skill has been acquired, this
can be accomplished with one resetting of each two reproducing
heads, after which a second record is produced. A small portion of
such a second record is shown on the righthand side of FIG. 3.
Here, the portion shown of record 59 shows that static time
corrections have been applied on each composited short trace to
produce substantial time alignment of all of these six traces.
It is desirable in the use of this method to have as many traces of
the sort shown in the top part of FIG. 3 as possible to increase
the precision of the static corrections. I prefer to use at least
five traces.
If the first record does not produce a completely adequate time
alignment, the pickup heads are again moved pairwise until such
result is accomplished. The appropriate static corrections have now
been introduced into the short-trace composited traces. The next
step consists in introducing exactly the same static correction
into the longer-trace composite traces. For example, traces 7
through 12 in the middle of FIG. 3 represent the composited effects
of the received waves along such as paths 25 and 30 in FIG. 1(a).
More specifically, as shown in the column marked "Times" trace 7
represents the composited traces where the source was at station 1
and the receiver group at 14 plus that for the source being at
station 16 and the geophone group 3. Similar notations are made in
this column for the other composited traces 8 to 12.
A key factor in my method lies in the fact that I have recognized
that the same error in static correction originally exists in trace
7 as existed on trace 1, and the same on trace 8 as trace 2, etc.
Now, however, a time correction has been introduced into the
composite for trace 1. Accordingly, the next step is to introduce
precisely the same static correction into trace 7 as was employed
in trace 1 to secure the time alignment of the short-trace
composite traces. By simply setting arcuately the same time
alignment correction for the heads compositing trace 7 as had
previously applied to trace 1, this trace now is statically
corrected. This same procedure is employed for each of the other
traces. Theoretically this is sound because in the compositing, the
time delay due to path 26 occurs once in the compositing of the
short traces and once in the compositing of the longer traces, and
the same is true for the time delays due to paths 27, 28, and 41.
Therefore, the same static correction should be employed on these
selected short traces and on the corresponding, selected longer
traces.
The introduction of this static correction in the longer-trace
composites, i.e., that appropriate by actual determination in the
top half of the record, will be found to produce not trace
alignment but traces with the composites so timed that they are
aligned by the appropriate normal moveout correction. This is shown
in the lower righthand part of FIG. 3, i.e., the second set of
traces 7 through 12. (Here, again, I prefer to employ at least five
traces.)
After the appropriate static correction has been introduced into
the longer-trace composite traces, the procedural steps vary,
dependent upon the type of second visual image which is to be
derived from these corrected traces. In each case, this will be in
the form of side-by-side seismic traces in a visual presentation,
but as discussed above, these composited traces may be employed to
produce either an interim section, a seismic section, or a velocity
panel.
If the interim section is to be portrayed, the appropriate dynamic
correction is introduced, i.e., the normal moveout correction is
applied to each composited long trace in a manner already known in
this art and which does not of itself form a part of the novel
features of my invention. FIG. 4 shows a portion of an interim
section using my interlock velocity, or INVEL method. This section
was actually obtained in the field. It covers eight sets of traces.
The Location number at the center of the subsurface coverage for
the respective sets of traces is indicated opposite the set. In
this example, these centers (locations of points such as the means
of locations 31 and 32 on FIG. 1((a)) ) were spaced at increments
of distance equal to four geophone group intervals. In each set on
this section, for experimental investigation only, the first four
traces are the short-trace composite traces for which the sources
were outside the respective geophone groups as shown in FIG. 1. The
next four traces are the longer-trace composite traces which have
exactly the same static correction pattern as the first four
traces, and, in addition, a normal moveout correction. The next
four traces down this record are the longer-trace composite traces
which are in transposed-ray relation to the previous four traces.
The last four traces are the short-trace composite traces that are
in transposed-ray relation to the first four traces. If the
initiation static corrections are equal to those at the short-trace
geophone locations, as is common when using surface sources such as
the Vibroseis operations, all four quadruplet traces will have the
same static patterns. This appears to be essentially consistent in
the various seismic sections shown in this figure.
A different type of INVEL display is shown in FIG. 5. This is a
type of seismic section display which is a very convenient tool for
evaluating velocity and hence can be used for a velocity panel. In
this figure the sets of eight short-trace composite traces are
plotted separately from the sets of eight longer-trace composite
traces.
The lower bank, displaying the longer-trace composite traces, is
called an INVEL repeated incidence section (hereafter, repeated
incidence is shortened to RI). It is a RI section because every
trace of each set has the same subsurface coverage. Even though
this subsurface coverage involves the sum of a number of depth
points, I find that considerable structural information still
remains on the section. These structural features are useful in
monitoring the data used in velocity determination, as will
hereafter appear. (Structural information may, of course, be
obtained from a conventional section, but it is convenient to have
that information directly on the INVEL section where it can be seen
during the velocity determination period.)
The INVEL RI section in the figure shows a reference at a time of
about 0.58 seconds. Because of a severe dip on the flanks of the
reef, the short-trace composite traces over the reef involve very
severe destructive interference and are useless. However, other
reflections are free of such destructive interference. These may be
used to determine the static corrections.
For illustrative purposes, the strong reflection at about 0.73
seconds is used to determine the static correction. Note that at
locations 29 and 33 the sets of short-trace composite traces are
curved. (Colloquially it is stated these traces exhibit
"arrowheads.") Since these two arrowheads are also found on other
deeper reflections, clearly a static correction is required. Now
referring to the RI section, it is seen that positive residual
normal
For illustrative purposes, the strong reflection at about 0.73
second is used to determine the static correction. Note that at
locations 29 and 33 the sets of short-trace composite traces are
curved. (Colloquially it is stated these traces exhibit
"arrowheads." Since these two arrowheads are also found on other
deeper reflections, clearly a static correction is required. Now
referring to the RI section, it is seen that positive residual
normal moveout occurs on this reflection for all the sets shown
between 13 and 53, except for sets 29 and 33. There is thus an
automatic check that the static correction is required to account
for this discrepancy.
FIG. 6 shows a different, more typical velocity panel, which again
is a type of presentation which is well known for obtaining seismic
velocity as a function of depth by determining in a systematic
fashion what normal moveout is required to produce reflections on
the various adjacent traces which show essentially linear
alignment. In order that such arrangement be effective, it is of
course necessary that adequate static time corrections be made. My
INVEL arrangement works very well with such a section, in the sense
that it permits the proper static corrections to be applied to the
composited traces before the systematically varying normal moveout
corrections are applied from which the appropriate velocities are
determined, in terms of the total reflection times.
The velocity panel shown in FIG. 6 is prepared using only one field
record. This would correspond to one location on the section shown,
for example, on FIG. 4, However, in this case the processing
involves applying the normal moveout which would be appropriate for
one particular subsurface velocity through the length of each
record presented. Accordingly, on FIG. 6 the first column shows a
record prepared, with a normal moveout correction appropriate to a
constant velocity of 5,800 ft/sec. The same record is then employed
in the next column, except that now the seismic velocity is 5,900
ft/sec, and so on. While there are many ways in which geophysicists
can employ such a panel to determine velocity as a function of
depth, one simple treatment will suggest the utility.
If precisely the right static corrections have been applied, and if
the normal moveout correction for any particular reflection is for
exactly the appropriate velocity for that particular travel time,
the entire group of traces presented in any one particular column
should be in time alignment, thus presenting a straight line. If
the appropriate normal moveout has not been employed, there is
systematic curvature from trace to trace, due to the variation in
x-distance. The traces, therefore, will show a "bow" or "arrowhead"
which will be convex for a wrong seismic velocity and concave for
the opposite kind. In this particular figure, for example, at the
left, the seismic velocity is too low and the "bows" all show a low
spot at the center. On the extreme right, at least in the upper
part of the panel, the velocity chosen was too great and the
opposite curvature of bow is seen. Accordingly, the trained
observer can work his way by eye across the record picking out at
any particular reflection time the particular column in which the
nearest approach to complete time alignment is achieved, or the
center of such time alignment traces if several columns show about
the same correction. This permits the variation of velocity with
travel time to be ascertained. A line has been plotted superimposed
on this velocity panel showing the velocities at particular travel
times, at which there are no arrowheads or bows, showing average
velocities ranging from 6,100 ft/sec at slightly under one second
travel time to 8,200 ft/sec at a travel time of about 2.8
seconds.
Now it is apparent that if the proper and precise static
corrections have not been applied, under no conditions should the
traces in any one column in this record show a complete lineup.
Accordingly, the INVEL system already discussed is particularly
appropriate to correct these traces shown, especially since precise
corrections may be applied even through the x-distance employed for
the velocity panel is quite great.
It is to be noted that in using the INVEL method, static
corrections are determined from the short-trace INVEL sections in
the form of lead or lag times which, trace by trace, are to be
added or subtracted as appropriate to the long traces involved on
the INVEL RI section.
While this discussion has been limited to an analog arrangement for
applying the static correction determined from the short composited
traces to the appropriate longer-trace composite traces as already
described in connection with FIGS. 1, 2, and 3, it should also be
stated that in the modern system of using digital recording
techniques, and applying timing corrections, both static and
dynamic, by computer, precisely the same steps are appropriate in
the INVEL system used with this method of recording and record
computer processing as in that described above.
FIG. 1 refers to split spreads. But the INVEL method may also be
used with single-end spreads if for every surface point the
initiation static correction is (approximately) equal to the
reception static correction, as in the case of surface sources. The
spread configuration is basically shown in FIG. 7. Here the numbers
corresponding to the various elements shown in FIG. 1(a) are again
used. The main single-ended shots are made with the surface source
used first in position 1 and next in position 70 (i.e., at the
location of geophone group 3) while maintaining a spread of
geophone groups from 3 to 16, as shown in this figure. Later a shot
is made with the surface source moved to position 71 (i.e.,
position of geophone group 14), recording at location 16.
Using such configurations, the operator of this method composits
the impulsive source type of record along the ray paths 24 and 29
and uses composited trace to produce a first visual image of such
composited trace with those obtained at other spread distances or
x-distances while maintaining the same reflection points (in this
case 31 and 32) on the reflecting bed of interest. One then
introduces the statis correction to align these composited short
traces, as was described in connection with FIG. 3. Finally, one
uses such static corrections in the composited long trace or long
x-distance records along wave paths 25 to 30 shown in FIG. 7. In
other words, the technique used is essentially that previously
disclosed when using split spreads, i.e., the configuration of FIG.
1, except the difference in the placement of the seismic source at
location 70 and 71 and the addition of traces, such as those at
geophone group locations 15 and 16.
It should be added, as is probably apparent, that the other
configurations producing data for the static corrections for the
case of single-end spreads utilize the configuration shown in FIG.
7, but with a decreased set of geophone groups. In other words,
FIGS. 1(b) and (c) have a precise analogy in the arrangement shown
in FIG. 7.
The following additional comments are appropriate regarding
practices in applying the INVEL method of determining velocity.
These comments refer to near-trace INVEL sections such as the top
bank of traces in FIG. 5. Each trace of this bank of traces is
produced by compositing near traces for which the reflecting points
in any one composite may be very far apart. If a reflecting horizon
has strong uniform dip, destructive interference would tend to
destroy the reflection during the compositing process. In that case
it would be necessary to correct the reflection for dip, at least
approximately, before preparing the near-trace INVEL section. For
the same reason it is desirable to apply approximate static
corrections before using the INVEL method so that the INVEL method
needs to deal with only the residual static corrections.
As was mentioned early in the discourse, the interlock-profile
methods of velocity determination are subject to error from bed
curvature. The INVEL method is no exception this rule but it is
important to understand that the INVEL method can minimize this
source of error -- for the following reason. Bed curvature affects
only the near-trace composite traces (since each long-trace
composite trace is a composite of traces all having had the same
reflecting points). Therefore, usually relatively shallow
reflections would be utilized on the near-trace composite section,
the bed curvature usually being negligibly small for shallow
reflections. Generally speaking, to determine the static
corrections one must avoid reflections which are suggested by the
seismic section to have significant curvature. When curvature
cannot be avoided, one must rely on averaging velocity
determinations derived from a long span of the seismic section.
* * * * *